ADVERTISEMENT

Does College Football really need 85 scholarship players?

Why not knock it down the NFL 53? Or even let's say 65. This would not be bad for Iowa. It keeps the OSU's from being able to hoard players.


Title IX isn't going away.

This also stops Iowa from doing the same. Not to mention there is player loss every year. You need depth.
 
If we cut it to 80, that would be enough to improve parity. The sec, Michigan and Ohio State..... more quality on every team, better evaluators and coaches would win more. I feel it would favor Iowa.
 
You can still have depth, just less players on scholarship.
Meaning all those players that Iowa takes away from MAC schools and turns into starters end up going elsewhere to get a scholarship. I’m not sure why this would be a good thing for Iowa at all
 
Since @JRHawk2003 doesn't understand basic math, let me break it down for everyone else:

Say FBS college football reduces the scholarship limit by 20 and Iowa reapportions those scholarships somewhere else.

That is NOT a net 20 gain across the board. Instead, it leaves 20 * 130 = 2600 football players whose D1 dreams get cut. It just moves the problem somewhere else.

Say goodbye to the Josey Jewells, JJ Watts, and Baker Mayfields of the world, since teams would no longer have the ability to take a flyer on guys. Furthermore, it does not "spread out" the talent, since it would do nothing to affect regional recruiting biases, the traditional strength of teams' recruiting or specific recruiters, or even just the recruits' preferred schools.

All of this is a moot point though, because swimming and men's tennis were already on the way out at Iowa, and it had nothing to do with football being "bloated", but rather the fact that those sports cannot support their own weight.
 
Since @JRHawk2003 doesn't understand basic math, let me break it down for everyone else:

Say FBS college football reduces the scholarship limit by 20 and Iowa reapportions those scholarships somewhere else.

That is NOT a net 20 gain across the board. Instead, it leaves 20 * 130 = 2600 football players whose D1 dreams get cut. It just moves the problem somewhere else.

Say goodbye to the Josey Jewells, JJ Watts, and Baker Mayfields of the world, since teams would no longer have the ability to take a flyer on guys. Furthermore, it does not "spread out" the talent, since it would do nothing to affect regional recruiting biases, the traditional strength of teams' recruiting or specific recruiters, or even just the recruits' preferred schools.

All of this is a moot point though, because swimming and men's tennis were already on the way out at Iowa, and it had nothing to do with football being "bloated", but rather the fact that those sports cannot support their own weight.

NOOOO!!!!! NOT BAKER MAYFIELD!!!!

Lol
 
The 53 man roster in the NFL is very misleading. Yes they have 53 players on the active roster. They also have 16 on their practice squads the can be called up when needed. The also have Physically Unable to play (PUP) and Injured reserved lists. On top of that, if they are getting a little thin in a position they can just go out and sign someone that is not currently with another team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 59DAWG
I'd be in favor to dropping the scholarships limit to say 75. It would help to level the playing field to some extent, and it would require schools to have a good walk on program. I think it would really benefit schools like Iowa, Wisconsin and others who have been on the heals of the blue bloods.
 
ADVERTISEMENT